Search Results

The OsteoMed ExtremiLOCK Wrist Plating System is indicated for fracture fixation, fusion and osteotomies of wrist and other bones appropriate for the size of the device. It is intended for use in trauma, general surgery and reconstructive procedures.

OsteoMed ExtremiLOCK Wrist Plating System implants are intended for single use only.

The OsteoMed ExtremiLOCK Wrist Plating System is a rigid fixation and fusion system consisting of plates and screws in various configurations along with the appropriate instrumentation to facilitate modification and implantation. Plates are anatomically pre-contoured in various shapes and sizes. Screws are provided with variable angle locking and non-locking heads and are either fully threaded or partially threaded in various lengths. These screws are either solid core or cannulated and can be used with or without plates. The system also contains K-wire implants.

The implants of the OsteoMed ExtremiLOCK Wrist Plating System are made from Titanium per ASTM F-67 (Plates), Titanium Alloy per ASTM F-136 (plates, screws and washer), and Stainless Steel per ASTM F-138( K-wires). The dimensional modifications to the screws include the addition of flutes (for screw lengths ≤ 16mm), tapered tip, decrease in thread pitch, and of the system has already been cleared through OsteoMed wrist predicate 510(k) K152145.

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification for the OsteoMed ExtremiLOCK Wrist Plating System. It does not describe a study involving an AI/ML powered medical device. Instead, it details the substantial equivalence of a new version of a wrist plating system to a predicate device. Therefore, much of the requested information regarding AI/ML device studies, such as acceptance criteria tables, sample sizes for test/training sets, expert adjudication, MRMC studies, or standalone algorithm performance, is not applicable.

However, based on the provided text, I can infer the acceptance criteria and the nature of the "study" (verification testing) for this specific medical device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

• Sample Size: The document does not specify the exact number of screws or plates tested. It broadly refers to "the screws (subject device)" as being part of the verification testing.
• Data Provenance: The testing was conducted internally by OsteoMed as part of their premarket notification process to demonstrate substantial equivalence. The document does not provide details on the country of origin of the data beyond "OsteoMed" (based in Addison, Texas, USA). This is prospective testing, specifically designed to evaluate the new device.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

• This question is not applicable as the "ground truth" for this device is based on engineering standards (ASTM F543) and mechanical performance comparisons, not human expert interpretation of data. The ground truth is objective mechanical strength and performance.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

• This is not applicable as the evaluation is based on objective mechanical testing against engineering standards rather than subjective assessments requiring adjudication.

5. If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance:

• This is not applicable. The device is a physical medical implant (wrist plating system), not an AI-powered diagnostic or assistive tool for human readers.

6. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:

• This is not applicable. The device is a physical medical implant, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used:

• The ground truth used for this premarket notification's "performance characteristics & testing" is engineering standards (specifically ASTM F543) and direct mechanical performance comparison to a legally marketed predicate device.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• This is not applicable. There is no AI/ML training set mentioned or implied for a physical medical implant undergoing mechanical verification testing.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

• This is not applicable, as there is no AI/ML training set.

Ask a specific question about this device